The next guy who blames T.O

[Cole]

Hitler liked dogs.

That isn't even remotely admissible...

 

[Big Dakota]

I'm really going to go OFF and let him have it.
Laced throughout this forum, you can't escape it.
It's the easy target, chicken-crap, no courage, no thinking, scapegoat thing to say.
"Oh, Dallas didn't live up to expectations? Get rid of T.O."
"Oh, the slightest thing wrong? Get rid of T.O."
"Traffic light out in Fort Worth? Get rid of T.O."
"Hurricane passes through Texas? Get rid of T.O."

It's what all the idiot pundits and T.V. talking heads resort to anytime there's a hangnail or nose bleed in Dallas. "Get rid of T.O." The same yappers who so many of you despise for their anti-Dallas sentiments. It takes NO courage to "blame T.O.", because it's safe and you know that nobody will challenge you. It's like telling jokes about white, Christian males, because you know that no one will challenge you on it because it's the "in vogue" and acceptable thing to do.

The only sin T.O. has committed in Dallas is maybe, only because he wants to win so much, that he airs out his thinking in public. But even THAT has been minimal. His reputation precedes him, so he's got to bear the brunt of that. Even though he was right about everything he said in Philly, his way of going about it ruffled alot of feathers.
He's never committed a crime. Never been suspended (by the league) for anything. Stays in maximum shape year round. And wants to win so badly that maybe his mouth runs before his brain realizes it's moving.
If this team had another 40 T.O.'s on it, we wouldn't be in this position.
This team has three major problems, and T.O. isn't one of them.
Jerry Jones meddling and domineering.
Bad and uninspired coaching (see "Jerry's meddling above) resulting in undisciplined and stupid play.
And finally, Romo needs to be "Holmgrenized".

That's it. Three things. T.O. is NOT the problem in Dallas, and I'm sick of hearing it.

TO is a punk and so are you? does that qualify?

 

[Cole]

Get outta here, you Oklahoma troll.

 

[bbgun]

That isn't even remotely admissible...

Admissible? This ain't a court of law.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

TO is a punk and so are you? does that qualify?

TO is a punk, but this culture existed longer than TO has been here

he's just a conveniant scape-goat

 

[Big Dakota]

Get outta here, you Oklahoma troll.

my bet, your ****** *** gets banned.

 

[Big Dakota]

TO is a punk, but this culture existed longer than TO has been here

he's just a conveniant scape-goat

I hang the horns squarely on Jerry, chack my posts.

 

[bbgun]

Get outta here, you Oklahoma troll.

Newbie accuses long-time poster of being a troll. And they say Americans don't get irony.

 

[Cole]

Newbie accuses long-time poster of being a troll. And they say Americans don't get irony.

If you were a Texan, and a non-bandwaggoner you'd understand...

 

[dadymat]

TO is a punk and so are you? does that qualify?

look............T.O. is even dividing this forum...................

 

[Big Dakota]

TO is a punk, but this culture existed longer than TO has been here

he's just a conveniant scape-goat

Jeez Bob, i didn't even see you changed your handle. wow.

 

[Hostile]

I hang the horns squarely on Jerry, chack my posts.

Or listen to you and me go at it on the radio.

 

[Nav22]

The real question is, "Is he worth the trouble?" That's not a question that Romo, Witten, or Ware would find themselves on the wrong side of.

"Trouble"... real or perceived "trouble"? Two VERY different things when it comes to #81.

When he's one of the more popular guys on the team, yet the ratings-driven media SWEARS he tears the team apart, I smell agenda.

That's not a question that Romo, Witten, or Ware would find themselves on the wrong side of.

Then you don't remember the conclusion of 2007 very well. The story was that Romo's Cabo trip was the catalyst for the playoff loss. There were questions about Tony's leadership and his focus.

Again, real vs. perceived "trouble"...

Oh, Witten was in Cabo too.

True, that's Jerry's screwup.

I'd ask for some rationale behind the thinking that we'd have been a better team since 2006 without one of the best WRs in NFL history, but I know I'd be wasting my time.

If you're dropping passes, giving up on routes, stabbing your QB in the back, and throwing tantrums on the sideline, then you're a big part of the problem.

He hasn't stabbed Tony in the back. Get real. Anytime he's asked about Tony he has nothing but good things to say.

The sideline tantrums weren't an issue when Michael Irvin or Jerry Rice did it.

Once again, real vs. perceived "trouble".

You're right about the drops and poor routes being problematic. Romo's turnovers hurt us as well, as do Flo's false starts or Ware's offsides. The negatives don't even come close to the positives, though.

Hi-larious. No, winning is incidental. His touches are the highest priority

So he cried after the Giants loss last year because he didn't get many touches?

as we found out after the Bengals game--a game that we won but still left him pouting like the narcissistic brat that he is.

Show me what he said after the Bengals game. Because I'm 99% sure you're wrong here.

 

[dadymat]

Newbie accuses long-time poster of being a troll. And they say Americans don't get irony.

.....

 

[Big Dakota]

Or listen to you and me go at it on the radio.

I'm awaiting the rematch

 

[RainMan]

What we're seeing in this thread is the inevitable threat T.O. poses to a franchise.

Whether inadvertent or not, he's a polarizing figure. Just look at what he's doing to those of us in this thread. Think some of these same things aren't being said behind closed doors among members of the team? Players who are tired of him taking subtle shots at others while deflecting blame, while others feel he's continually wrongly accused?

Unfortunately, this is the bed we got in when we got him. For the record, I was entirely for the move and still am glad we got him. We were a franchise seemingly going nowhere heading into 2006, and needed some sort of jolt. T.O., once Romo got in the lineup, helped eventually provide one over time. But I also never really envisioned him becoming a pillar of our franchise for a lengthy period of time. You kind of assumed at some point his act would wear thin, justifiably so or not, and he would be exiled.

Personally, I fear he's too valuable from an Xs and Os standpoint to get rid of. I'm not going to proclaim to be a football genius, but I have trouble believing his presence alone hasn't helped Romo and Witten become the players they are. Granted, Witten was good before Owens got here, so maybe my fear is based on unsolid ground -- which is why I'm not completely closed-minded to the idea he must go.

To finish, I agree with the T.O. fans who say he's often unjustly criticized. He can make a harmless comment but it's in three-inch headlines the next morning. Everything is overblown with him. Now that's not to absolve him of all his wrongdoings. He clearly makes plenty of poor comments as well. I'm just saying I don't think it's always his fault, and didn't necessarily see him as the key evil figure in that whole Romo-Witten-Owens debacle of a soap opera that came out earlier this month.

But again, whether he inadvertently creates it or not, a circus does follow him everywhere he goes. It's just part of the package.

And the question becomes: Does that, coupled with what obviously seems to be the need to constantly placate him, create too big a burden for the players and coaches? Does it impede our ability to win games and bond as a team?

Possibly. But so, too, could releasing him. He has a lot of people on his side. Releasing him could splinter us even worse.

And therein lies the dilemma he creates.

 

[Nav22]

Outstanding post, RainMan. I agree 100%.

 

[bbgun]

"Trouble"... real or perceived "trouble"? Two VERY different things when it comes to #81.

Real trouble, which is why he's on his third team and #4 is just over the horizon. Bill Cowher, the guy many here are pining for, said yesterday that the first thing a new coach should do is cut TO. Care to compare your credentials to his?

Then you don't remember the conclusion of 2007 very well. The story was that Romo's Cabo trip was the catalyst for the playoff loss. There were questions about Tony's leadership and his focus.

The Cabo trip wasn't a problem any more than TO's elaborate, star-studded birthday party was a problem. The "problem" was Tony's lack of discretion. And to say there's a huge gulf between a mini-vacation and selfishly-inspired locker room turmoil is to beg the obvious.

I'd ask for some rationale behind the thinking that we'd have been a better team since 2006 without one of the best WRs in NFL history, but I know I'd be wasting my time.

You mean like all those other teams that are better than us sans Owens. Yeah, I think we could have pulled that off.

He hasn't stabbed Tony in the back. Get real.

Sure he did. Get a clue.

Anytime he's asked about Tony he has nothing but good things to say.

I said he was a rat, not stupid.

The sideline tantrums weren't an issue when Michael Irvin or Jerry Rice did it.

You seem to think that "wanting to win" and "acting like a professional" are incompatible. Wrong. Show me where Witten, Romo, Staubach, or Dorsett screamed at teammates or coaches when things weren't going their way.

You're right about the drops and poor routes being problematic. Romo's turnovers hurt us as well, as do Flo's false starts or Ware's offsides. The negatives don't even come close to the positives, though.So he cried after the Giants loss last year because he didn't get many touches? Show me what he said after the Bengals game. Because I'm 99% sure you're wrong here.

It was the first Skins game. Whoop dee doo.

 

[Hostile]

I'm awaiting the rematch

Any time.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Gun, while you make good points, what about the way Aikman yelled at his teammates, Irvin screamed, ranted and raved?